Your quotes of the skills are word for word what I quoted from exactly the same source. Only difference is that I actually referenced to the words where as you made up new uses that arent mentioned in the current skill package. As per RAW you cannot use spot to keep watch or spot a pickpocket as they are active checks (your own words, if you cannot spot a lion you cannot spot a pickpocket) unless your character of course declares that he is using an action every 6 seconds he is in a crowd to spot for them.
The lions in alter room was my rebelion to this "players have to actively declare everything" as I do not agree with that way of playing personally...but if that is what is written in the rules that is what they want us to test.
Your quotes of the skills are word for word what I quoted from exactly the same source. Only difference is that I actually referenced to the words where as you made up new uses that arent mentioned in the current skill package. As per RAW you cannot use spot to keep watch or spot a pickpocket as they are active checks (your own words, if you cannot spot a lion you cannot spot a pickpocket) unless your character of course declares that he is using an action every 6 seconds he is in a crowd to spot for them.
You didn't reference words, you butchered context in an effort to make a point. The descriptions, taken in their entirety, are very clear in how they are to be utilized within the narrative.
Saying that we have to use an action every 6 seconds in order to accomplish our shared story is... grandiose. A check made can apply to sweeping adjudications, and a night's watch is a solid example.
Keep watch: Drawing on my keen senses (spot), I scan the treeline for signs of movement. At any time during my watch, the Dungeon Master would use that check to contest a creature's attempt to stealth past the treeline.
Spot a pickpocket: Drawing on my keen senses (spot), I keep a sharp eye on Lady Stark's beltpouch as we through the crowd. At any time during our tour through the crowd, the Dungeon Master would use that check to contest a thief's attempt to stealthily pick Lady Stark's pocket.
We tell our stories, we reference the dice as a measurement of total outcome, or serve as a basis of comparison -- then we move on.
The lions in alter room was my rebelion to this "players have to actively declare everything" as I do not agree with that way of playing personally...but if that is what is written in the rules that is what they want us to test.
You seem not to agree with the intent to remove dice from the forefront of the game's experience.
What skill can you roll to find a secret door acording to the skills document? Same with creatures being active in an area, the activity being sneaking or hiding. Not using prior version knowledge but only reading what the rules say: Both search and spot accomplishes the above. The rules mentions nothing about standing guard or other examples (that I of course know because I also played 3.5). Can anyone mention an INT+spot theyve made? Or WIS+search? The reason they are so rare is because they are not 2 skills but one skill aplied with 2 stats.
Playing Microlite20 really prepares you better for playing Next than Next does with their clumsy "all stats can be used for everything, but not really cause here is the rigid 3.5 skill system you need to.combine it with" Next atm would be so much better off with no skills than with an old fashioned recycled system. Its like fitting an oldsmobile tyre on to a modern sportscar.
"The search skill is the Nancy Drew skill. You use it to modify ability checks made to rummage through desks, notice things out of the ordinary, pick up clues, discern that a device is rigged, and generally do sleuthy things.
The spot skill is the Scout skill. You use it to modify ability checks made when keeping watch, catching on to sleight of hand, recognizing things that can be seen, and measuring visual acuity."
I'm agreeing with Mr PopStar here. Search and spot should be separate. You search through someone's clothes, you can't spot or listen. You search through a room for the secret button to open the trap door, or you search along the hallway for traps. While spotting could afford some of those actions, search is used enough in games that it deserves to be a separate skill.
I can see your point, Keendk, and I agree with the sentiment, but I think the game would be better served having the two separate. On the other-hand, there is no benefit to having many of the skills separated. They should be handled by the DM and player in game with colorful descriptions instead of throwback skill types.
"You seem not to agree with the intent to remove dice from the forefront of the game's experience.
I'm a huge fan of getting the dice out of my way. "
I believe that statement is blasphemous and you should be locked up. XD Half of the fun is dice rolling. That anticipation of luck gracing your action is an important part of DnD in any version. Without it, you are just free-form storytelling, and that has no where near the same level of excitement to me.
What skill can you roll to find a secret door acording to the skills document? Same with creatures being active in an area, the activity being sneaking or hiding.
You don't roll skills.
Not using prior version knowledge but only reading what the rules say: Both search and spot accomplishes the above. The rules mentions nothing about standing guard or other examples (that I of course know because I also played 3.5).
You can determine the existence of a secret door by visually noticing it (spot), uncovering the fact that people have passed through (track), recognizing that there is something fishy about the architecture (profession: carpenter), happening upon it (search), overhearing whispers on the other side (listen), and countless other ways.
There's more than one path towards engineering the same outcome -- what's the problem?
Can anyone mention an INT+spot theyve made? Or WIS+search? The reason they are so rare is because they are not 2 skills but one skill aplied with 2 stats.
I don't understand what you're saying.
The rules governing Intelligence state that "Intelligence describes your mental acuity, your education, and your ability to reason, recall information, and employ logic to overcome challenges and complications. You typically use Intelligence to remember an important fact, find clues to a puzzle, or cast an arcane spell." (How to Play 5)
Take a second look at search: You use Search whenever you actively look around for cluesthatpoint to a hidden object, such as a trap or secret door, or hintsthat might point to a person’s or creature’s passage through or activity in an area.
Search is sleuthy, and it makes perfect sense that the stat describing your mental acuity, ability to reason, and ability to find clues would most often apply to it.
The rules governing Wisdom state that "Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to your surroundings, representing general perceptiveness, intuition, insight, and other, less tangible senses. Wisdom is also important for understanding divine edicts and expectations." (How to Play 5)
Take a second look at spot: You use Spot to notice creatures lying in ambush ahead of you on the road, see signs of a thief hiding in the shadows of an alley, or catch sight of a faint gleam of candlelight under a closed secret door.
Spot is perceptive, and it makes perfect sense that the stat describing how attuned you are to your surroundings, and your general perceptiveness would most often apply to it.
Playing Microlite20 really prepares you better for playing Next than Next does with their clumsy "all stats can be used for everything, but not really cause here is the rigid 3.5 skill system you need to.combine it with" Next atm would be so much better off with no skills than with an old fashioned recycled system. Its like fitting an oldsmobile tyre on to a modern sportscar.
There is no 'rigid skill system' -- the game has never been so open and free-form with regard to its measurement of capability.
I believe that statement is blasphemous and you should be locked up. XD Half of the fun is dice rolling. That anticipation of luck gracing your action is an important part of DnD in any version. Without it, you are just free-form storytelling, and that has no where near the same level of excitement to me.
LOL Rolling the dice is fun, and the randomness they bring to the game has its place, but I'm specifically addressing the fact that dice-emphasis is more of an obstacle than it is a boon.
The dice should only be employed when they are meaningful. The game of Dungeons & Dragons is a shared story first and foremost.
There is a good case for making Listen, Search, and Spot into one skill (Perception), while there is also a case to be made for merging Swim and Climb (Athletics)... When I first saw that they had been re-separated in the Skills document, my heart sank a little. This is, however, because I have grown attached to the Skill Challenge, and to employing my characters' skills more broadly. Once I had a little time to adjust to the idea, however, I became more and more comfortable with it.
The 'overlap' that mrpopstar alluded to is part of the reason; despite the specificity of 'Listening', or 'Spotting', you don't need to have both Listen and Spot in order to detect a creeper in the dark. Either skill can help you. You don't have to 'waste' an extra skill and take both of them. Either one makes you a perceptive character.
In the end, what really won me over was when I considered the new (or, some might say old) direction play seems to be shifting toward. Exploration, interaction, combat, and other game aspects sharing the spotlight more equally. THIS is the real argument for keeping Listen, Search, and Spot separate entities (Swim and Climb as well...). When Combat is the sole focus of the game, it doesn't matter so much HOW you perceive your enemy - as long as you can find them, and keep them from getting the drop on you. Similarly, when stony ridges, rushing water, cliffs and gaps over spiked pits adorn your battle mat, Athletics is the simplest way to reduce these obstacles to their most basic game element - difficult terrain. No muss, no fuss. Kind of takes the role playing out of it, though. If memory serves, the backgrounds typically offer a set of four skills. If we allow very broadly applied skills, like 'Perception', 'Athletics', and 'Insight', they are applicable to so many situations that it kind of makes the other skills pale in comparison. The exploration part of the game is meant to be a much larger aspect in D&DNext - if you allow Perception to cover anything related to surveying an area, and Athletics to cover anything to do with actually navigating that area, then all you need is two skills and you've got your skill die bonus to virtually every exploration check. All of a sudden that skill die seems less impressive, and more like something everyone should get to roll all the time.
Well, it's already too late for a short, sweet post, so here's a bit more regarding skill 'redundancy'. To be perfectly honest, I'm of the opinion that Diplomacy ( I mean Persuade ), Bluff, and Intimidate aren't enough options for using skills to communicate with NPCs. The way the new skill system works, it's very easy for DMs to plunk in or take out skills they feel would be useful in their campaigns. In my campaign, I'll be dividing Persuade into 'Reason' and 'Appeal' - one for when you are making a logical case in your favour, and the other for when you are attempting to placate a creature via anything from begging to flattery.
I very specifically said "what skill can you roll" as you DO roll skills in next as its a skill die, it wants to be rolled not gently put down. You are right that there is no skill CHECK, its an ability check where you "roll a skill" and add it. I know its a bugbear of yours so I tried to be specific in my language, dont really know how else to have worded it: "what skill can you roll when you roll an unspecified ability check" perhaps, but I think thats just spiltting hairs.
I am a big fan of the ability system having been opened up so much, and that you roll int for searching and wisdom for spotting. I think its great and adds a huge degree of "openness" to the system as a whole. Go MM, youve got it right! How they expand on this with skills however is where the rigidnes sets in imo. To make any skill "usually/always rolled with X ability" is locking down all the goody openness we got from the ability system.
And that is where search/spot fails to add anything to the game as seperate entities. I want to find a trap by being aware of my souroundings I roll wisdom +search or spot. I want to find a trap by reasoning I roll Int+search or spot. The differentiation of the 2 skills comes in the stat being used and not from the skill it self. So as skills are specialities and being expert at something they should be able to be clearly defined completely unattached to a stat. They arent at the moment. search is reasoned organised finding of X spot is intuitive awarenes in finding of X
Indeed, the outlines of the Spot and Search skills seem to steer them very sharply towards being consistently used with Wisdom and Intelligence, respectively. That could be a bit of an issue - but at the same time, most skills will tend toward one or two particular abilities most often, I would imagine. You can use Intelligence to try and reason the best route up a treacherous cliff, perhaps - and augment that with your Climb skill die - but in practice, the Climb skill die will probably still be applied to Strength checks more often than not. And, you could also justify adding a Spot skill die, or a Search skill die to that same ability check (all 3 skills applicable assuming you are in a position where you can see various routes or aspects of the cliff ahead).
The main issue seems to be that there is a great deal of prospective overlap between the two skills. I can see that, and I definitely agree that it is there - but there are also many prospective applications for each skill that do not so easily overlap, and many ways for other skills to overlap just as easily, and that's why I think they're valid as separate skills. You can see in the example above how a cunning player can create overlap between Search, Spot, and even Climb, given the right context. Yet - in the above example, if the cliff is largely invisible (covered by fog, perhaps), Search becomes a more viable option - as you can perhaps deduce the route most often travelled. In the above example, if the cliffside is covered in a fresh layer of snow, Spot or Climb seem more applicable - as the snow conceals evidence of past travellings, but you can still attempt to discern the best route.
I agree that the description of the skills really lends itself to overlap - but that seems fine. If I only get 4 skills to choose from (failing the receipt of bonus skills), I'll be all too happy to have those skills overlap with other characters' skills from time to time. We might all be trying to find a secret door - but I can be knocking on the walls and Listening for signs of a hollow spot while my friend's character is stuck sifting through Troll dung Searching for a telltale footprint.
I very specifically said "what skill can you roll" as you DO roll skills in next as its a skill die, it wants to be rolled not gently put down. You are right that there is no skill CHECK, its an ability check where you "roll a skill" and add it. I know its a bugbear of yours so I tried to be specific in my language, dont really know how else to have worded it: "what skill can you roll when you roll an unspecified ability check" perhaps, but I think thats just spiltting hairs.
There is no such thing as unspecified ability checks.
LOL It's not a bugbear, I'm just pounding the point because it seems to be a glaring nail that keeps rearing its head.
I am a big fan of the ability system having been opened up so much, and that you roll int for searching and wisdom for spotting. I think its great and adds a huge degree of "openness" to the system as a whole. Go MM, youve got it right! How they expand on this with skills however is where the rigidnes sets in imo. To make any skill "usually/always rolled with X ability" is locking down all the goody openness we got from the ability system.
There's no rigidness, the rules merely take the initiative to make an example of reasoning in the application of skill training.
And that is where search/spot fails to add anything to the game as seperate entities. I want to find a trap by being aware of my souroundings I roll wisdom +search or spot. I want to find a trap by reasoning I roll Int+search or spot. The differentiation of the 2 skills comes in the stat being used and not from the skill it self. So as skills are specialities and being expert at something they should be able to be clearly defined completely unattached to a stat. They arent at the moment.
The nuance is still challenging your understanding...
The game assumes competence. If you were able to notice a trap simply because you are aware of your surroundings, you would automatically just notice the trap; the Dungeon Master would describe it to you -- that simple. Otherwise, the trap is hidden, and it requires action on your part in order to find it.
There is no passively mechanized resolution function, everything in the game is now manual and largely binary -- you're hidden or you're not, you can see it or you can't, you have to take an action or you don't. The dice don't decide these things for us unless we're checking or contesting the narrative.
